Translation Theory is for researchers. A simple translator do not have to know all these theories!  It is the same with "driving a car". To drive a car you do not have know all the theory behind the car! 

You can translate without knowing anything about translation theory. It may be more important to have strong computing skills.

Thank you Keith for your answer, can give us some tangible examples.

It is perfectly possible to translate without having any knowledge of translation theory, and this is how I used to translate before starting my research degree in translation studies. However, what I have learnt from the study of translation theory is that it makes you a more aware translator, in the sense of thinking more carefully about the different options for a given translation and the effect that choosing a particular option may have. For example, in the novel I am translating as the focus of my research -- Gracias por el Fuego by Mario Benedetti (1965) -- the strongly marked style of the novel, involving repetition, long lists, and linguistic patterning which ranges from particular uses of prepositions through to highly condensed, short sentences, actually forms part of the structure of the novel. Failing to attempt to reproduce these features in the target text, and simply going for a fluent English text, would seriously distort this structure and lead to a presentation of the original in an entirely different light.

Translation theory can help us to analyse and interpret a source text and the context of its production, think about the audience for whom the translation is intended (its reception) and consider a range of possible strategies for the translation. In short, I believe that an awareness of some of the main strands in translation theory has the capacity to make a translator a better translator, although of course it is no guarantee of this!

The discipline of translation studies in the best universities worldwide does not prepare PhD. holders that are necessarily qualified or skilled practical translators but theorists of translation. This may suggest that practical translators needn't have explicit knowledge of translation issues such as equivalence, foreignization, or naturalization, etc. The body of translated texts worldwide is produced by skilled professional translators that have no explicit training in linguistics or translation studies. To take up Costas's driving metaphor, translators learn to translate simply by translating not by theorizing about translation. However, knowledge of translation theories, as Roy rightly suggested, may be desirable or useful for a practical translator to get acquainted with what is going on in the theory.

I am no expert on translating languages because I only speak English.  I subscribe to Gadamer's (1986) notion that all perception, and all translation, involves interpretation. Translators don't necessarily need to know theory, but as discussed in the thread on theory and practice, incorporating theory to enhance practice is wise. Driving a car is a technical act that can hardly be compared to interpreting language. How does interpretation best capture the original text? How much personal bias can be filtered out?  What makes a good translation? Linguist and associate professor of classics at St. Peter's University applies translation theory to her attempts to translate her autistic son's communication. She likens it to translating an ancient unknown language and describes the translation theory of Walter Benjamin. For him, apparently, it is important to approach translation not as reproduction but as creating harmony. Chew's interesting paper can be found in Davidson & Orsini (Eds.)  Worlds of Autism (2013). The horizon of sensitivity and context of the translator makes all the difference; why wouldn't theory, not as the rote learning of academic postulation but the appreciation of varied perceptual frameworks, increase the quality and maturity of translation?

I think you need them for defending your final result. If the commisioner ask you why do you translate the work in this way you can say based on certain theory i apply this method. Therfore they are not that useless that you think

In my experience as a literary and audiovisual translator so far (25 years...) I have never had much use of translation theory (actually, I had translated some five books by the time I learned that there was a "theory" to what I was doing...) and I believe it is the case of most translators even these days. I have worked for many publishing houses, TV stations etc. and nobody has ever shown the slightest awareness that there is any theory or any approach they might expect.

I have noticed, however, that too much theory is quite dangerous for prospective literary translators. My students, who have a lot of theory during their studies, are genuinely afraid of translating literature because they know from various theorizers that it is an impossible (or at least extremely complicated) task.

Theory understanding will support the translator in problem solving of translation activities. It means that theory as the starting point to solve the problem needed by translators  although not all cases. Based on the experiences, the translators may do their activity smoothly. They just give little thinking for theory of translation. Anyhow, for the researchers, teachers, and instructors of translation, the theory of translation becomes more important not only as the starting point but also the basic guideline for their work. It will become more beneficial and fundamental as the previous studies, even as the framework theory, supposed hypothesis and so on. Theory  of translation has different function for the practitioner (translators) and academia (lecturers, researchers, teachers) ...................... Working with feeling is a nice but it is not an art.

I totally agree with Roy. Of course, one can be a translator without having studied translation theory, and no doubt highly competent: but one becomes a better translator if one does study it, because one has a greater arsenal of problem-solving techniques. Like any theory, eventually one assimilates it and it becomes a natural part of ones translation work - much like the theory of music allows one to be a better musician, but you don't consciously apply that learning when playing. You are, however, able to apply that learning consciously if you so wish, and this gives you precious analytical and problem-solving capacities that you would not have without having been down that route. You become a more subtle translator, more able to use different approaches and techniques that are apt for the target needs, and that appreciate the subtle challenges of the source text.

"A simple translator"

Here is a comment that leaves me pondering.

Is there such a thing as a "simple" translator?

I thought translators were both at least bi-lingual, and to some extent bi-cultural, and to me, this entails some complexity!

A "simple" translator turning into a humble theoretician.

My first answer was a bit ironical because as a practising translator, trying to turn theoretician, I have very conflicting feelings on the question.

I guess, as a researcher, I'd better have thoughts.

So here are a few observations, unfortunately maybe too autobiographic. You might want to take them as testimony.

As a translation student, long ago, I was tought some translation theory, mostly history of translation and the philosophical questions around translation and the orientation ot the text.

I found those classes interesting, from a cultural point of view, but frustrating because my problem was to become a translator, to learn to improve my student translation to become a pro. And these classes failed to meet this need.

I know, now, that this was not the point.

I did pragmatic translation for the publishing business, doing artbooks, DIY books, anything outside of literature, and then started teaching this very specific translation specialisation.

So I started reading a lot of theory.

Some of it was obscure, uselessly complicated and very time consumming.

I really enjoyed reading Sergio Viaggio, A general theory of interlingual mediation

because, the author develops a model (based on Garcia Landa, using a mathematic presentation I respond to.

But I did not think I would present it to translation students because it would take time away from developping problem solving strategies to deal with translation.

For a translator, reading theory is a way to take some distance,

- maybe to look at one's practice,

- to think more about it, to escape the everyday life drudgery of churnning out at least 15,000 signs a day to make a living (if from a very priviledged place, a lot more if not).

It is something you do for intelectual pleasure, comes with maturity or when you start training others.

But then really, what you need to teach is how to communicate clearly, how to write in a style that reveals meaning, making the reading experience rewarding for the reader. You end up teaching a lot about cultural differences and adaptation.

So, if this qualifies as theory, I'd say whether we (meaning translators) actually add research to translation, we do develop some theory and are able to discuss it.

My concern is that translation studies focuss on very few languages.

So many translators working with languages for which there is little or no translation theory are ignored by translation theory. So may be your question leads to :

Can translation theory ignore translators of so many languages (other than the most commonly spoken and translated)?

Interesting thoughts you end with, Sophie. Of course, the theory of theory is that it should be non-language specific; it is an attempt to generalise. But the history of translation taught in translation theories courses run in the US and Europe is absolutely western hegemonic civilisation based; all the translation theory principle authors that I have studied are English language with very few exceptions (some French, some Italian, some Spanish). But I have found it rather frustrating that it is such a closed shop - I would have liked us to consider the French school more, for example, they take quite a different approach (but it is considerably at odds with the direction being followed by Translation Studies, so... it could certainly confuse students).

I think there does need to be a differentiation between language/translation skills theory (how to translate well and challenges met with different language pairs/cultural differences) and the more academic questions around subjects discussing things such as, I don't know, 'why retranslate', etc.; and not all theoretical academic research will necessarily aim at improving or teaching people how to improve at physical translation.

David Bellos has some interesting comments to make about the attitude to translation in other cultures, Japan, for example, in his 'Is that a Fish in Your Ear'. And there is of course a widening recognition and awareness of cultural difference within Translation Studies - well, that started in the '80s - but, look at Anthony Pym, he has a very high proportion of students from Asia, he is definitely someone who is open to exanding the boundaries of Translation Studies, but that does not remove the teaching of generalised abstraction to theoretical level approaches to translation strategies in his recent book and classes.

SIL has a lot of interesting documentation on how to approach actual translation for very disparate languages and cultures, even if it is entirely Bible-translation oriented.

It may, though, be up to translators precisely to open up worlds: I am sure there are writings on translation arts in other cultures and languages, that have not been translated into English (being the main language that needs to be targetted) or other European languages, for example. What we can't read, we can't know.

I have been thinking about translating some of the French theory writers, since they do seem to me to be under-represented, for example - but surely cultures with strong translation traditions such as Japan, India, various Arab speaking cultures - all have a rich past and great thinkers over many centuries. I would love those worlds to be opened up to me more!

You may also (all) find this Anthony Pym paper of interest, 'Designing a course in Translation Studies to respond to students’ questions'

http://usuaris.tinet.cat/apym/on-line/training/2015_TS_for_questions.pdf

Vivian: some resources on this subject would be ..

Andrew Chesterman and Emma Wagner, 'Can Theory Help Translators?'

Jean Peeters (ed), 'On the Relationships between Translation Theory and Translation Practice' (especially Ernst-August Gutt and Brian Mossop in this volume)

Jean Boase-Beier, especially in 'Translation: Theory and Practice in Dialogue', ed by Antoinette Fawcett, Karla L. Guadarrama García and Rebecca Hyde Parker.

NO! Even though you think you haven't any kind of translation theories while translating, you have some theoretical notions that are there guiding your practice, and not necessarily a sistemathized theory of translation!

Anton Popovič wrote: «If not all translators rely on theory, this does not mean that this is useless. The creative translator welcomes it because she feels enriched and helped in a reliable way. To the argument that it would be possible to translate even without theory, I argue that even the most skeptical translator actually takes part in the formation of the theory: it is what she does every time she reviews his work, reflects on it, evaluates it».

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Theoretical_or_practical_translation

check answers

check answers for the same question here

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Theoretical-or-practical-translation

regards

Actually, this will be a question and some information about my activities in the field. Today (March 17, 2021) I am starting to collect information/data for a research article to be submitted to "Baltic journal of English Language, Literature and Culture", the deadline is April 30. Since 1972 I have been a practicing translator and interpreter, simultaneously reading lectures in linguistics, contrastive linguistics, translation theory and applied translation studies for BA, MA and PhD students. As a Professor, in the last 10 years I have been reading lectures on the mentioned subjects now. So, being a theorist and (having been) a practitioner (1972 - 2015) I fully understand the two polar opinions. In one of my books "Three Decades of Translation Studies in Latvia. 1984 - 2014" I have analyzed around 1770 publications of Latvian translatologists and made certain conclusions concerning their research interests. In fact, I plan to create a questionnaire where Latvian theorists and practitioners will be invited to provide their opinion on the problem.

I would say that I agree with the statement that "even the most skeptical translator actually takes part in the formation of the theory" (Lamis Ismail Omar).

Could anyone inform me whether surveys (in the form of interviews, questionnaires etc.) of this nature have been conducted anywhere else around the globe? Many thanks for your future answers!

(By the way, an incomplete list of my publications can be found here, in the ResearchGate. Publication titles of the last 5 years can be found at https://www.venta.lv/tsf-en/janis_silis).

in fact any translator is applying a sort of translation theory. The procedures of adding, removing , paraphrasing or making a footnote are all conscious decisions taken by translators, hence are taken after reading and analysis stages. This is exactly what Translation Theory suggests.

Most translators don’t even know of translation theory, especially French translators, as it is seen as something absolutely intangible and quite far away from translation practice. However, in my opinion, not knowing about translation theory is no hindrance as the mere fact of translating does constitute a way of applying theory of any kind: some translators will translate in order to make the target language more readable for the audience, and some others will translate in a way that privileges the source text over the target language, being the latter more erudite. Translating literally, adapting culturems, modulating, etc., for instance, are some other ways of applying translation theory. The fact is that translation theory is a descriptive discipline, not a prescriptive one, and it departs from observing how translations are made and how translators work. In this sense, knowing deeply translation theory can be a way of increasing the quality of the translations made available on the market.